Politics
- Started
- Last post
- 33,467 Responses
- AngryMob0
^ Tell the asshole that this is about...
NOT ALLOWING THE GOVERNMENT TO UNLAWFULLY INTRUDE AND FORCEFULLY RUN OUR INDIVIDUAL LIVES, MAKING OUR CHOICES FOR US, THUS TAKING AWAY OUR FREEDOMS.
Can you tell them that you Pinko? Can you? No you can't you liberal rag.
- calm down angry dude.DrBombay
- Johnny?PonyBoy
- What freedoms have you lost again?DrBombay
- I like my healthcare. Always have. The freedom to choose. I don't need Obama telling me what I must have.AngryMob
- No one is doing that. Not sure what you have been reading but it is incorrect.DrBombay
- But they are.AngryMob
- TrollJonnyPompa
- AngryMob0
Okay, tell them that the Constitution guarantees... life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...
Not...
life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and healthcare.
You see, every american wants those "citizens" who require healthcare, to have healthcare. But not via a hostile, $1,000,000,000,000 government takeover. Got that? Good.
- It's not a takeover though, so the rest of your point falls apart.DrBombay
- It IS a takeover. Please.AngryMob
- Explain...DrBombay
- It says "general welfare" in the constitution you know.TheBlueOne
- ukit0
AngryMob is fucking angry
- BonSeff0
AngrySlob should take of advantage of that policy he is so happy with and mix in a xanax the size of a hockey puck.. It would work in two ways: 1) calm him the fuck down, and 2) fill that ignint pie hole for 2 minutes.
- TheBlueOne0
ANGRYMOB IS ANGRY™
- johndiggity0
the real problem is that obama has failed to articulate what exactly this reform bill entails and how it is going to be financed. he either doesn't know himself, or is trying to mislead the public about it.
he brought up a "self-sustaining" public option "meaning taxpayers aren’t subsidizing it, but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services and a good network of doctors..."
i'm not sure how there can be a public option that isn't somehow financed by taxpayers. and if it is in fact publicly funded, why would you do this when the other comparable publicly funded healthcare option, medicare, is going broke.
people have a right to be up in arms until he is able to explain how this public option is going to be funded. the us government has a slew of failures when it comes to running businesses—amtrak, the post office, freddie mac and sallie mae just to name a few. why would we want to trust health care to their stewardship in the first place?
- DrBombay0
Let's get my Mom insured for less than $562 a month. I would pay to do so. That is where the money is coming from. Not sure anyone is advocating free rides. Just a cheaper ride.
- ukit0
- Coffeemaker0
You have dog-eared to response 8611, click here to re-open them.
- DrBombay0
Single payer is actually what I want, even though it won't happen. Think of the group buy you could get and there would be no competition. Walmart is able to sell common prescriptions that cost much more generally, to people for $4 because of their buying power. Other nations do it, why not America? An MRI in Japan costs $18, in America it is $1200. This is 30 year old technology and it costs virtually as much now as it did 20 years ago. How is this possible?
- Because there are a lot of people eating mad steaks of your bad breaks.DrBombay
- JonnyPompa0
I don't understand why this country is arguing over universal healthcare when most other industrialized nations see it as a no brainer.
- looks like it´s more about sabotaging the presidency than the actual healthcare issuegung_hoek
- Take a look at the cartoon aboveukit
- otherwise the ferocity of the campaign wouldn´t make sense, the issue is not ideological at the heart of it after allgung_hoek
- I think you need to brush up American political history a bit gung...TheBlueOne
- the issue IS the heart of conservatives hating liberals sine about 1932TheBlueOne
- all part of that damn FDR..St. Reagen undid much, but there's still social securityTheBlueOne
- God forbid people get healthcare ontop of that!TheBlueOne
- but the gov has all sorts of soc. programs already running, medicaid, etc.gung_hoek
- the opposition doesn´t attack them, so they seem to be fine with the principle.gung_hoek
- then it´s a fact that a universal system can coexist with a market driven system (germany)gung_hoek
- so it´s not that either. also: what is the ideology that they want to enforce?gung_hoek
- i take it you´re not referring to the idealogy privatization / public service in general?gung_hoek
- re-read that, you actually are. but still, that much ado about health?gung_hoek
- i was referring to "core" iss. like abortion, gay-marriage, guns; that´s where i would expect these kind of attacks...gung_hoek
- the opposition DOES attack them. The right has HATED social programs for 80 years now..TheBlueOne
- they've tried to kill SS many times, but it's too popular. They'll be damned if they give something else ot the people that they'll end up likingTheBlueOne
- that they'll end up liking.TheBlueOne
- ...ideology of the conservatives.gung_hoek
- i hear you. the shame is that the current state of education and free press ensures that it´s gettin worsegung_hoek
- reagan was surreal, guy is simply unelectable, yet turns out as the fucking messiahgung_hoek
- w.gung_hoek
- that he got a 2nd term was the coffin nail for american democracy (or press).gung_hoek
- there´s no excuse for the 2nd term. means the system is worthless. we´re heading that way too...gung_hoek
- doom.gung_hoek
- i´ll shut up nowgung_hoek
- DrBombay0
I think the opponents of any reform should read this: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/fr…
- johndiggity0
japan's per-capita gdp spend rate on healthcare is about less than half of the united states. i think we are all in agreement that insurance companies contribute to the large difference, and probably the deficiency in quality.
however japan's per-capita national debt is about 10 times less than the united states. you can infer that the japanese government is much shrewder and more responsible than the united states in terms of fiscal policy and spending.
there is also a huge cultural difference. the japanese collective identity vs the individuality mentality of the us. that can't be underscored as to probably the main reason their healthcare system would not be able to see the same type of success here in the us.
- TheBlueOne0
Well, speaking from direct experience with Japan, as my wife has practiced both there and here in the US, there are some serious caveats. Certainly primary care in Japan is better, and much of the better longevity can be attributed to social/cultural conditions and a better diet overall (although that is changing..thanks McDonalds!)..however, from the doctors point of view practicing in Japan is quite difficult. They work much, much harder there than here, longer hours, more intense patient management, less pay, more scut work - even for fellows and attending physicians.
On top of that, malpractice isn't just a civil matter there initially, but the accusation brings immediate criminal charges, and doctors can find themselves in deep legal trouble very quickly.
Therefore, medicine as a career choice in Japan has lost a lot of luster, and the new doctors are avoiding the most riskiest fields - surgery, OBGYN, etc. You wouldn't believe the waiting period there for new mothers to see an OBGYN...it's insane. Some expectant mothers only get to see them for the first time in the 3rd trimester it's so backed up bc there are so few in that field. Lots of them go into pediatrics and geriatrics, or ID (infectious disease)...you don't get the emergency room, critical care, invasive cardiology, etc...which oddly enough are fields where America does have some of the best doctors in (thanks to our diet, drug use and societal penchant for violence mostly).
But the problems stem more from the lower pay scales and the inherent criminal risks of malpractice and not bc the system is "nationalized healthcare". Japan also has top notch medical technology and leads the way in cutting edge techniques in some areas.
But there is a deeper respect for doctors overall in that culture than in the US. Patients tend to give monetary gifts to their doctors after successful treatments, so that goes a long way to augment the lower pay scales.
It's a mixed bag...overall though the general medical consensus around the world though is that better primary care leads to healthier populations overall, and this is the one thing nationalized medicine does excel at and perform better than private systems.
- DrBombay0
Here is the deal where John and I will never agree on this:
I think that there should be no profit motive in health care. I believe it should be a right, like education. This idea leads to a better performing society in my opinion.- Well, there's ALWAYS winners and losers, but I agree as there will be more winners this wayTheBlueOne
- the losers will be the people making the moola off the sick and dying, and they're very angry if you take that away from themTheBlueOne
- from them.TheBlueOne
- Anyone who wants the status quo has a serious serious character flaw.DrBombay
- Making money off of denying sick people is well... sick.DrBombay
- exactly.gung_hoek
- or making money of people surviving for that matter.gung_hoek
- DrBombay0
You can disagree with my above statement, but the numbers don't agree with you.
- what numbers are you talking about? what have i agreed to?johndiggity
- Watch that frontline documentary I posted. You think it should be run as a business.DrBombay